Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple's App Store Needs a Radical Revamp; How Would You Go About It?

Posted by timothy on from the hammer-and-tweezers dept.

Nerval's Lobster (2598977) writes Given the hundreds of thousands of apps currently on offer, it's hard for any one app (no matter how well designed) to stand out on Apple's App Store, much less stay atop the bestseller charts for very long. In an August 10 blog posting, former Apple executive Jean-Louis Gassée offered Apple CEO Tim Cook some advice: Let humans curate the App Store. 'Instead of using algorithms to sort and promote the apps that you permit on your shelves, why not assign a small group of adepts to create and shepherd an App Store Guide,' he wrote. 'A weekly newsletter will identify notable new titles, respond to counter-opinions, perhaps present a developer profile, footnote the occasional errata and mea culpa.' Whether or not such an idea would effectively surface all the good content now buried under layers of Flappy Bird rip-offs is an open question; what's certain is that, despite Apple's rosy picture, developers around the world face a lot of uncertainty and competition when it comes to making significant money off their apps. Sure, some developers are making a ton of cash, but the rising tide doesn't necessarily float all boats. If you had the opportunity, how would you revamp/revise/upgrade/adjust/destroy the App Store to better serve the developers who put apps in it?

41 of 249 comments (clear)

  1. Slashdot proves it! by mythosaz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Moderation and meta-moderation solve all problems. :/

    1. Re:Slashdot proves it! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Moderation and meta-moderation solve all problems. :/

      There is a big difference. I don't make money for insightful comments. But I can make a lot of money from a highly rated app. So there would be a big incentive to game and corrupt the system. A people-based rating system would likely be an improvement, but it would have to be carefully designed to keep it honest.

    2. Re:Slashdot proves it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Moderation and meta-moderation solve all problems. :/

      You joke, but I can't figure out what on earth metamoderation even does any more. It used to be checking if a moderation was fair or not, but now it's deciding if a comment is good or bad? To what end? How does that impact Slashdot comments, commenters, or moderators?

    3. Re:Slashdot proves it! by mythosaz · · Score: 2

      Sure. Shills would play a larger part in the moderation of potentially "valuable" apps. If you had the possibility of making Candy Crush money, you'd hire armies of Indonesian "reviewers" to "moderate" your apps to the top, but what's the alternative? Use your army of shills to fake download your app as many times as possible and give it five-star ratings?

      I enjoy how the Play store does things. Shows me top apps in a number of categories, and shows me some reviewer-picked shakers and movers.

    4. Re:Slashdot proves it! by Rosyna · · Score: 2

      A people-based rating system would likely be an improvement, but it would have to be carefully designed to keep it honest.

      I thought Apple already had a people-based rating system. Or does "Editor's Choice" not mean Choice by the Editors?

  2. There's your problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you had the opportunity, how would you revamp/revise/upgrade/adjust/destroy the App Store to better serve the developers

    Whup, there's your problem. App Store is not designed to serve developers. It serves Apple. That's all.

  3. Permissions by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I would aggressively punish apps that demand overly broad access to your data.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
    1. Re:Permissions by turp182 · · Score: 2

      It would be nice to filter searches by permissions. I'm not sure if that is possible with Apple. Or Android.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    2. Re: Permissions by Karlt1 · · Score: 2

      I would aggressively punish apps that demand overly broad access to your data.

      That's an Android problem not an Apple problem. An iOS app has very few permissions by default and the app ask for permission it needs in the course of running. If you say "no" , the app still should work. You can turn off previously granted permissions on a per app basis - something you can't do with Android without hacks.

  4. Two things.... by bobbied · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1. Remove Apple from having it's name on the App Store (or just allow anybody to set up their own store)

    2. Removing Apple's 100% control of what apps are listed (Or just allow anybody to set up their own store)

    Having an APP rating system might be nice, one where users rate the app for content similar to video games as well as a user overall satisfaction score. However, just doing the first two things would fix it.

    But we all know Apple won't forgo the revenue stream and will NEVER give up editorial control because now it requires rooting your phone and voiding the warranty to set up any app store besides Apple's.

    So I guess, it's really just one thing... Allow anybody to set up their own store and not require user to root their device to load apps from it.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:Two things.... by plover · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The rating system would be gamed even more than Googl's PageRank system. Too much money at stake.

      --
      John
    2. Re:Two things.... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My girlfriend has an iPad, and she uses alternative app stores. They just curate the apps in Apple's store and link to it for the actual install and download, but she says the one she uses (sorry, it's Chinese, I can't remember the name) makes it much easier to find stuff than Apple's because it has social integration, so she can see what her friends use and rate highly.

      Google does the same thing with Play. If people you know on G+ rate apps highly or post about them they are more likely to appear in your suggested apps. It's kinda like what TFA suggests, human beings selecting apps, but doesn't cost Google anything and is tailored to the individual.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Two things.... by BasilBrush · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1. Remove Apple from having it's name on the App Store (or just allow anybody to set up their own store)

      2. Removing Apple's 100% control of what apps are listed (Or just allow anybody to set up their own store)

      Neither suggestion solves any of the problems listed.

    4. Re:Two things.... by mlts · · Score: 2

      I wouldn't mind the ability to sideload apps (one can do this in a limited fashion already)... but what will happen is that a Dancing Pigs 0-day will happen, Joe Sixpack and Jane Sertraline will follow the directions that the rogue website gives to download the .ipa file, load it in, then one can view the bouncing bunnies.

      Some websites which are set up to exploit any device they can already try this with apk files for Android and .deb files for jailbroken iPhones. I'm sure there are people who will download them because they are called "security updates", enable sideloading, and then install the files.

      Of course, after the sideload, their phone gets compromised, and they then hit the lawyers and press and blame Apple for allowing them to step out of the walled garden.

    5. Re:Two things.... by WaffleMonster · · Score: 2

      Of course, after the sideload, their phone gets compromised, and they then hit the lawyers and press and blame Apple for allowing them to step out of the walled garden.

      Remind me again who's fault it is when an app is able to bypass operating system enforced jail and gains global access?

      Seeing as OS vendors are never held liable for their security failures the scenario you paint is hard to take seriously.

    6. Re:Two things.... by unimacs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The reason the App store and perhaps even the iPhone itself was such a success is because there is only one place you need to go to find Apps. And although many on Slashdot complain about the "Walled Garden", having an App store run by Apple itself provides some assurance to the customer that the App is legit and not some form of malware.

      Is it perfect in that regard? No.

      I'm not sure. What revenue stream does the App store have? I mean other than the $99 annual developer fee. Is that what you meant? The developer tools themselves are free. I used to spend hundreds on development tools and upgrades so I guess I'm not bothered much by the $99. I can play around with the tools and creating apps as much as I want without spending a dime. It's only when I want to put an app on actual device that I need to spend the money.

    7. Re:Two things.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1. Will never happen. Apple didn't get to be the strongest brand in the world by letting anybody dilute it. I don't care if you think this is a good or a bad thing. It is what it is and I don't see it ever changing.

      2. I disagree strongly. Apple's control over it's app market is one of the few things keeping it (mostly) safe. While not perfect, it's a far cry from the stygian hell that is the play store. 3/4s of what you find on the play store I would call malware outright. I gladly recommended apple products to non-technical users because at the very least I know there are measures keeping the truly nasty shitware away. When your users are the technical equivalent of retarded toddlers that impulsively jam forks in to every electrical outlet they see, you need something like the apple store.

      Personally, I use an iPhone because it's simple and it works and there is broad support from nearly ever vendor on the planet. I fire it up every day and it does what I want. Updates are regular and painless. I can play around with fancy trendy shit, and turn it off when I don't care about it. It's an appliance.

        Apple's security model where you grant applications privileges at the time of request is vastly superior to the grant-at-install-forever model that android uses. (Google may implement this, but it will break a whole lot of apps)

      I use an android tablet, a linux workstation, a windows game computer I built myself, and a whole lot of other computing devices. Those are fine and fun geeky things and I enjoy doing those things. The phone, though, is something I can always rely on. I don't have to fuck around with 3rd party stores, what version of the OS i'm running, care about my screen size, or put up with preloaded and un-removable carrier shitware, or rooting my device.

      Sometimes less is more.

    8. Re:Two things.... by Guspaz · · Score: 2, Informative

      And introduces a whole lot of new ones. People rail against Apple's control over app store listings, but it really does go a long way to significantly reducing the amount of malware users get exposed to. Not all of it, to be sure, but most of it.

      They could probably allow a bit more freedom by still curating their own app store, and forbidden alternate app stores, but allowing some form of manual side-loading that is sufficiently non-automated to ensure people don't get tricked into installing malware.

    9. Re:Two things.... by BasilBrush · · Score: 4, Insightful

      None of which addresses the actual problems listed.

      You're just sticking your own biases for how things should be run, probably as someone who doesn't even use the platform, with a bogus problem that doesn't exist - there is no lack of innovation in iOS apps.

    10. Re:Two things.... by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 2

      What do you want to do? Sell devices or make money on apps?

      What if you'd asked Edwin Land the same question in 1972?

      What do you want to do? Sell Polaroid cameras or make money on instant film?

    11. Re:Two things.... by stoborrobots · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What revenue stream does the App store have?

      Taking 30% commission out of everything you sell via the app store and in-app?

      --
      "Go to CNN [for a] spell-checked, fact-checked summary" -- CmdrTaco
    12. Re:Two things.... by BitZtream · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You already had the OSx running Apple device then?

      It's OS X, not OSx, you might want to at least learn the name.

      Apple takes a pretty big bite from the proceeds to process the credit cards and such and sending the rest on to you.

      ... 30% is standard in pretty much every retail industry, and the fact that you think its a lot shows you've not actually done anything like this yourself or you'd know that for a $1 app, 0.30 is cheap considering you'll probably be paying at least $0.25 in credit card fees alone.

      So you've illustrated that all your concerns are that of someone who is ignorant of the way the process works.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    13. Re:Two things.... by khellendros1984 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why bother paying to develop for the #2 platform (12% sales) when you can develop for the #1 platform (85% sales) for free?

      Because the users of the #2 platform have already demonstrated a predisposition toward paying more than they have to for things, and I've seen claims that Apple users will pay more for apps. The iOS platform is also less fragmented than the Android platform, so there are fewer device configurations that you have to account for.

      Disclaimer: That's all word-of-mouth to me. I'm not a mobile app developer, but those are some of the arguments that I've seen others make.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    14. Re:Two things.... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      Okay. He didn't do his Apple Branding right. Big boo boo.

      30% off the top is pretty substantial. Why you insist on comparing it to 'every retail industry' is kinda weird. Why not compare it directly to other software operations? Like, how the percentage compares to the percentage a publisher that sells on their own web page gives up for infrastructure/billing costs?

      You seem like, or at least are a self-appointed, expert on the matter of selling software. So why are you making flawed comparisons?

    15. Re:Two things.... by Bogtha · · Score: 2

      And although many on Slashdot complain about the "Walled Garden", having an App store run by Apple itself provides some assurance to the customer that the App is legit and not some form of malware.

      I don't think malware is particularly worrisome in the average user's mind. I think it's more about quality.

      Speaking as an application developer, the vast majority of times I've had to say to clients "Apple won't allow that", it's been something that is self-serving and user-unfriendly if not downright abusive. Apple serve as a convenient foil for developers who care about users and stop developers who don't care from going too far.

      As a developer, I know first hand how frustrating it is to have a great idea for something that Apple simply won't allow, but at the same time, I frequently see the benefit its policies bring to end users.

      For instance, just the other day I saw a developer complain that a client wanted to force users to enter their personal information (e.g. age) before they could use the application, so that they could use it for marketing. Simple solution: Apple don't allow that. But Google does. How do you think policies like that are reflected in the average application quality?

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  5. Liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The second you hand storefront management over to a human you open yourself up to a million lawsuits from people alleging unfair business practices.

  6. Gassée's suggestions aren't bad, but... by unimacs · · Score: 2

    It would inevitably lead to some developers of accusing Apple of playing favorites.

    What they could do instead (or in addition) is allow 3rd parties to easily obtain information on the most recent submissions, upgrades, etc and let them supply users with information on what is new and noteworthy.

    It's good for Apple to surface really valuable apps, but it's not their job to do the marketing for every developer nor to make sure that everyone turns a profit. They've made a huge change in the industry by making virtually all the apps available for a popular platform available from a single place. This has had both positive and negative effects on developers. It was great for awhile when there weren't that many developers and all it took to get your app in front of millions was to submit it. Now your app is competing with hundreds of thousands of others.

    It could simply be that the market is saturated and no amount of App store revamping is really going to fix that.

  7. Remove old apps. by BasilBrush · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are apps that were put up years ago, presumably were not much of a success, and remain, never updated. All they do is clutter the store up, and make it harder to find the good, up-to date stuff. They should be removed. It's not obvious how...

    Perhaps when sales have faded to almost nothing. Perhaps remove any that are still using deprecated APIs.
    Perhaps remove any that are not using iOS 7 design features.
    Perhaps increase the yearly charge for being on the store... maybe decoupling it from the charge to be a developer. And make the charge per app, such that no hoper apps are voluntarily given up.

    1. Re:Remove old apps. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A member of my family was just given an older iPod Touch this very week. The device has the latest iOS available to it - v4.2.1 if memory serves. It has been almost impossible to find any games that can be installed to a device running an iOS version that old.

      So I don't think that removing apps that only work on the newer OS'es is the answer. Both because of the arbitrary forced-obsolescence, and also because I think that is already being done effectively, and isn't resolving whatever problems people are complaining about here related to the app store.

    2. Re:Remove old apps. by zlogic · · Score: 2

      There are some niche apps which were updated a long time ago and yet continue working well. For example an SSH client https://play.google.com/store/... (this is Android, but still). There are some clones of this app, adding some extra (perhaps unneeded) features, and either display ads or require payment while the original app is completely free and open-source. If it works well even on the latest hardware, should it really be removed if it's no longer updated and does not generate as much cash as the clones?

  8. SEARCHABILITY by brunes69 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The biggest problem both the App Store and the Play Store have is searchability. There is no way to filter on anything other than high-level category and keyword, and whatever the result-based ranking algorithms on both stores uses, is horrible, always returning junk and crap instead of what you really want.

    This makes finding the kinds of apps you want even when you KNOW what you are looking for EXTREMELY ANNOYING AND OVERLY DIFFICULT, way more so than it has to be.

    It is very ironic that Google whose main business is search can not cobble together the resources to make a decent search for Android over the past 5 years.

    1. Re:SEARCHABILITY by mfearby · · Score: 2

      Amen to that, brother! The search is terrible. We need the ability to sort by popularity, download count, most recent first or last, etc. And when you click the back button to go back a page, actually go back to the page as I had it previously, not a collapsed version of the category I was looking at. I HATE looking in the App Store for apps due to the cornucopia of rubbish. The crap to quality ratio is very high, alas.

  9. I don't understand your concern by Brannon · · Score: 2

    1. There's nothing stopping someone from creating their own curated portal which links directly to the per-app download page within Apple's App store. These portals could have reviews & social media or whatever. Why haven't these sorts of portals emerged?

    2. Android doesn't have the walled garden--are the Android app stores wildly easier to use or better at promoting good vs. bad content?

  10. And if you think small devs are upset now... by sirwired · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you think small-time developers are upset now, I can only imagine how furious they would be if Apple started doing "pay for play". BillyBobIndy would have even less of a chance to make it.

    Really, Apple wouldn't make that much money from it, and the reputational costs would be too great. I could see a "sponsored" category being set up, but nothing beyond that.

  11. Yeah, right... by sootman · · Score: 3, Funny

    Your post advocates a

    ( ) technical
    ( ) legislative
    (x) market-based
    ( ) vigilante

    approach to fixing the app store. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work.

    (x) Apple is doing quite well these days, thankyouverymuch, and doesn't really give a shit how you think they should be run. (You, in general, public at large, and probably you, in particular, JLG.)

    (x) Scammy developers will pay people in 4th-world countries to say their app is great.

    (x) Probably a bunch more reasons that I don't have the energy to think up this second.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  12. Browse, not search by shilly · · Score: 4, Informative

    A couple of folks have said it, but it bears repeating: we need hundreds of categories and subcategories. Think Amazon, not Google.

    I want to look at all the diabetes monitoring apps, or all the Talmud apps, or find the BA app. A search throws up way too much junk. A browse of a category is at way too high a level. And I want to look at all the apps in my subsubcategory, and know I've seen all of them. Search doesn't cut it. Categories and browsing is needed.

  13. How to fix ALL the app stores... by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Step 1 remove ALL the freaking flashlight, mirror, and fart apps. All of them.
    Step 2 no longer allow any app that replicates abilities in the stock phone.
    Step 3 Free ad choked apps are not allowed to be called "free" but "advertising supported"
    Step 4 eliminate in app purchases.
    Step 5 only apps that have no ads can be called free, groups can release open source free apps for zero cost to them.
    Step 6 all apps have a 30 minute 100% refund return policy. If I buy an app and find it is crap, I can get a 100% refund and it is removed from my phone.

    THAT is how you fix not only the apple store but the android and all other "app" stores.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:How to fix ALL the app stores... by zlogic · · Score: 3, Informative

      Step 2 no longer allow any app that replicates abilities in the stock phone.

      Not such a god idea. If Android has a browser, a "social networking" app (Google+), a music player, an SMS app, a maps app and so on, alternatives may still be useful (e.g. an alternative SMS app with spam blocking, an alternative maps source).
      Or iPhone, which has Safari, forces all browsers to use the Safari rendering engine. Not so great if someone develops a better browser with ad blocking, a faster (or more standards-compatible) rendering engine, or some other features besides another UI with bookmarks sync.

      Step 4 eliminate in app purchases.

      Some in-app purchases are good. For example add-supported apps that allow to disable ads for a fee will keep settings, while the traditional solution with a free/paid version clutters the appstore and loses your settings if you upgrade, since it's a completely different and isolated app.

  14. Re:Nerval's Lobster by mythosaz · · Score: 2

    Lobster needs to die.

    The humane way is a sharp knife straight down behind the eyes.

    Most research suggests they don't feel pain (as such) so submerging the head in boiling water first (as you begin to cook them) is also acceptable. [Dunking them completely in boiling water causes them to thrash, and might cause a fire on the stove, especially since you're busy clarifying butter on the other burner.]

  15. If the 12% spend more by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

    Other than that users of the 12 percent platform spend more money than users of the 85 percent platform?

  16. Re:Let's see, just at the top six nuisances... by pla · · Score: 2

    if you don't like most the native apps, why the fuck do you use an apple product in the first place?

    I could have put that a better way - The native apps work okay, but in many cases, better alternatives could exist. Apple looooves minimalism, and hard; some apps (like the frickin' task manager) should have far, far more detail and options available. Which I would add as a point #7, quit disallowing certain types of "system" tools.